Electrical Engineering in Japan, Vol. 174, No.
1, 2011
Translated from Denki Gakkai Ronbunshi, Vol. 128-B, No. 10, October 2008, pp. 1235–1242
A Multibranch Exchange Method for Distribution Loss Minimization
MASAHIKO MURAI,1 YOKO KOSAKA,1 TAKENORI KOBAYASHI,1
and YUMIKO KANESHIGE2
1
Power and Industrial Systems R&D Center, Toshiba Corporation, Japan
2
Power Control Computer Systems Department, Toshiba Corporation, Japan
SUMMARY
This paper presents a multibranch exchange method
for reconfiguration of distribution systems to reduce their
line losses. In this method several switches are closed and
opened simultaneously in each branch exchange operation
to expand the search neighborhood. The switches to be
closed are selected as the intermediate systems will be
meshed configuration. Sequential branch opening method
can be applied to open the switches to obtain the radial
configuration efficiently. Test examples show the effective-
ness of the proposed method in the case of double branch
exchange. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Electr Eng Jpn,
174(1): 40–48, 2011; Published online in Wiley Online
Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI 10.1002/eej.21015
Key words: distribution system; loss minimiza-
tion; combinatorial optimization; heuristics branch ex-
change; sequential branch opening.
1. Introduction
Loss minimization in distribution systems is known
to be a combinatorial optimization problem of determining
switches on or off so as to minimize losses. However, actual
large-scale problems involving thousands or tens of thou-
sands of switches are difficult to solve by exact methods
such as the branch and bound algorithm, and hence approxi-
mate heuristic algorithms have been proposed, such as
branch exchange [1–3] and sequential branch opening [4,
5].
In the branch exchange method, a radial configura-
tion is considered as the initial state. A switch is closed and
another switch is opened, while maintaining the radial
configuration in each operation. The operation is repeated
sequentially so as to minimize losses. In the branch ex-
40
change method [2], the loss reduction achieved by branch
exchange is estimated without the power flow calculation,
which allows fast solution search. However, this is a local
search in the neighborhood formed by branch exchange,
and hence only local solutions close to the initial solution
can be obtained.
On the other hand, in sequential branch opening, all
switches are closed to configure a meshed network as the
initial state, after which the power flow is calculated and a
switch which has minimum current is opened, with repeti-
tion of the procedure until a radial configuration is obtained.
This method is known to offer quasi-optimal solutions not
depending on the initial solution [5]. Feasible solutions are
not found until the final radial configuration is obtained,
and therefore the method may prove impractical when
computing time is limited.
In this paper, we propose a method of loss minimiza-
tion in a distribution system by multibranch exchange,
which is an extension of the branch exchange method
involving multiple branches simultaneously in each opera-
tion. Previously, multistage branch exchange was proposed
for distribution system expansion planning by repeated
branch exchange in several stages [6]. The objective func-
tion need not necessarily decrease at every stage of branch
exchange, and as a result, the search neighborhood is ex-
panded to minimize the objective function. However, when
such branch exchange is performed in multiple stages, all
initial and intermediate combinations that do not reduce
losses immediately should be checked for final loss reduc-
tion. This may complicate the algorithm and result in a
considerable increase of the computing time.
On the other hand, in the multibranch exchange pro-
posed in this study, multiple switches are closed at once to
obtain a meshed configuration; after that, the same number
of switches are opened to obtain a radial configuration
again; thus, the search neighborhood is expanded to mini-
mize the objective function. To obtain a radial configuration
from the meshed configuration, usually the switches to be
© 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
opened are selected by the sequential branch opening
method, which is expected to improve calculation effi-
ciency.
The present paper is organized as follows. First the
problem of distribution loss minimization is formulated in
Section 2, and then the multibranch exchange method is
introduced in Section 3. After that, numerical simulations
using the double-branch exchange are applied to a simple
example system and a real-scale system in Section 4. The
efficiency of the proposed method is verified by compari-
son with the single-branch exchange.
2. Distribution Loss Minimization Problem
The problem of loss minimization in a distribution
system consists of choosing switches on or off so as to
minimize power losses, while maintaining a radial configu-
ration.
In practice, one must consider various constraints,
such as voltage limitation and line capacity limitation. As
regards voltage, regulation is usually possible by means of
devices such as transformer taps or SVR. On the other hand,
constraints on line capacity limitation are unlikely to be
violated because the load is allocated nearly uniformly
among feeders in the course of loss minimization. Thus, we
ignore the above constraints in this study.
We make the following assumptions about the distri-
bution system.
• The loads are constant-current loads.
• The load is distributed uniformly in a section.
• The load power factor is 1.
• The current phase change caused by line imped-
ance is negligible.
• The switch impedance is negligible.
Under the above assumptions, sectional power loss
can generally be expressed as follows (see Appendix 1):
Fig. 1. Example distribution system.
41
(1)
Here Iin is the section inflow current and Il is the section
load.
Consider the loss minimization problem for the ex-
ample system shown in Fig. 1. In the diagram, F1 to F3 are
feeders, 1 to 6 are sections, and 1–5 are switches. Open
and closed switches are represented by " and E, respec-
tively. As is obvious from the diagram, the distribution
system has a radial configuration, with section 1 supplied
from feeder F1, sections 2 to 4 supplied from feeder 2, and
sections 5 and 6 supplied from feeder F3.
The power loss is minimized as follows. A switch,
such as switch 1, is closed while switch 2 is opened, a new
radial configuration is created, and the loss is calculated.
This procedure is repeated for every possible radial con-
figuration, and the one resulting in the minimum loss is
selected. There are 8 radial configurations with different
switch states, including that shown in Fig. 1, and hence the
best one (with minimum loss) can be found by simple
comparison. However, when this algorithm is applied to a
real-scale distribution system, the number of configurations
(switch combinations) grows enormously, and selection
becomes impractical. Thus, various methods have been
proposed to find the approximate minimum-loss configu-
ration within a realistic time frame.
3. Optimization Algorithm
3.1 Algorithm outline
In conventional branch exchange, one of the open
switches in a given radial configuration is closed to make a
new loop, and another is opened so as to minimize the
power loss in the new loop. This procedure is applied to all
of the open switches, and the lowest loss configuration is
selected. The same procedures are applied again to the
configuration yielding the lowest loss, and so on, in an
attempt to minimize the total power loss in the distribution
system.
On the other hand, in the multibranch exchange
method proposed in this paper, the search neighborhood is
expanded by simultaneous exchange of multiple branches
so that the local optimal solution approaches the global
optimal solution. In particular, the search neighborhood can
be extended by selecting a meshed configuration including
several closed branches. Then sequential branch opening is
applied to this meshed configuration, and quasi-optimal
solutions are obtained rapidly by sequential opening.
The algorithm of multibranch exchange is illustrated
in Fig. 2. The steps of the algorithm are explained below.

Fig. 2. Flow diagram of multibranch exchange method.
(Step 1) A radial initial configuration is prepared and
set as a candidate solution, and the power loss of the initial
system is calculated. This power loss is compared to that of
the modified configurations in Steps 4 and 6.
(Step 2) N open switches are closed to obtain a
meshed configuration.
(Step 3) In the meshed configuration obtained in Step
2, N switches are opened to obtain a radial configuration,
while sequentially minimizing the current.
(Step 4) The power loss is calculated for the new
radial configuration obtained in Step 3. If the loss is lower
than that of the candidate solution, the solution is updated.
(Step 5) A check is made to determine whether N
unprocessed open switches exist. If such switches exist, the
algorithm returns to Step 2; otherwise, it proceeds to Step
6.
(Step 6) If the candidate solution has been updated
(with respect to the initial configuration), then the algo-
rithm proceeds to Step 7; otherwise, it jumps to Step 8.
(Step 7) The candidate solution is considered as a new
initial configuration, and the algorithm returns to Step 2.
(Step 8) The current configuration is output as the
minimum-loss solution.
42
It should be noted that in Steps 2 to 5, the N switches
to be closed are restricted to switch combinations in which
N loops overlap to form a meshed configuration.
Below we consider the calculation of the switch
currents required for determination of the switches to be
opened in Step 3 so as to obtain a meshed configuration,
and the calculation of the line currents in a meshed configu-
ration required in order to find the power loss at Step 4.
3.2 Calculation of loss minimization in branch
exchange method
First we demonstrate that the branch exchange pro-
cedure is performed by opening switches with minimum
currents in a loop obtained by switch closing.
The amount of loss change caused by branch ex-
change can be expressed as follows [2]:
(2)
Here ∆I is the load transferred between feeders, E1 and E1g
are the voltage drops from respective feeder through the
ends of the switch to be closed, and Rloop is the total
impedance of the loop created by closing switches.
The above also applies to uniformly distributed loads;
a derivation is given in Appendix 2. Since ∆I in Eq. (2) is a
quadratic function, the minimum value of the power loss
achieved by branch exchange occurs when ∆I is the closest
to the following load:
(3)
According to Thévenin’s theorem, Eq. (3) is equivalent to the
variation of the current due to switch closing, and therefore
opening the switch with the smallest current in the loop system
is sufficient to transfer the load closest to Eq. (3).
In the multibranch exchange method, switches are
opened so as to sequentially minimize the current in a
meshed system, and therefore local optimality is not guar-
anteed; however, one can expect quasi-optimal local solu-
tions.
3.3 Calculation of switch current in meshed
configuration
We next explain the calculation of the line current
after the closing of switches, which is required in order to
determine the switches whose closure yields the minimum
current in a meshed configuration. We consider the ex-
change of two branches, but the same approach applies to
three or more branches.
Figure 3 shows a distribution system in which a loop
is formed by closing one switch. By Thévenin’s theorem,
the amount of current change can be calculated as follows:
 Fig. 3. Variation of current with first switch closing.

(4)

Here EA and EB are the voltages on, respectively, the feeder

fA and feeder fB sides of the switch; and Rloop = RA + RB,
where RA and RB are the total section impedance from Fig. 4. Variation of current with second switch closing.
switch’s end to feeder fA and feeder fB, respectively.
The current increases and decreases by ∆I on, respec-
tively, the feeder fA and feeder fB sides of the switch. That
(10)
is,
(5) Therefore, the currents in the various parts can be expressed
(6) as follows:
Here IA and IB are the currents on, respectively, the feeder (11)
fA and feeder fB sides of the switch.
The section voltage drop is as follows [see Eq. (A.4) (12)
in Appendix 2]:
(13)
(7) (14)

Here Iin is the section inflow current and Il is the section

load.
Therefore, the voltages EA and EB on both sides of the
switch can be found by applying Eq. (7) to the respective
sections from the feeder’s outlet to the end of the switch.
After the switch is closed, the voltage at the next switch to
be closed can be found by applying the same calculation to
the updated currents.
Figure 4 shows a distribution system in which a loop
is formed by closing switch 2 (second closing). Here the
amount of current change can be calculated as follows:
3.4 Calculation of currents produced by
opening switches in meshed configuration
Here we explain the calculation of the line currents
when switches are opened in a meshed system, which is
performed in order to find the power loss in a new radial
system.
Figure 5 shows the distribution system obtained by
opening first switch 1. Here the current variation is

(8)

Here EB and EC are the voltages on, respectively, the feeder

fAfB and feeder fC sides of switch 2; and RA, RB, and RC is
the total section impedance from branch point to outlet of,
respectively, feeder fA, fB, and fC.
The variation of the current in a loop system formed
by closing one switch is divided in inverse proportion to the
total section impedance from the branch point to the feed-
ers; that is,

(9)
Fig. 5. Variation of current with first switch opening.

43
 Table 1. Section loads and impedances of example
system

Fig. 6. Variation of current with second switch opening.

∆I = −ISW, while the current branched to the rest of the loop

is in inverse proportion to the impedance. Therefore,

(15) switch 4, the current passing through the loop can be

(16) calculated as shown in Fig. 8(b). Here, too, the smallest
current is obtained by closing switch 4, and hence the
(17) power loss does not change.
Now let us consider double-branch exchange when
(18)
switch 4 is closed in Fig. 8(a) or switch 1 is closed in Fig.
8(b). When switch 1 is closed in Fig. 8(b), the current that
(19)
flows in the system is shown in Fig. 9(a); therefore, the
system shown in Fig. 9(b) is obtained by opening the
(20) smallest-current switch 2. After opening smallest-current
switch 5 in Fig. 9(b), the new configuration is obtained.
The current variation ∆I for the next switch opening (Fig. The power loss in the system shown in Fig. 7 is
6) can be calculated by using the current with direction 57.067 W, and the system obtained by double-branch ex-
opposite to ISW as follows: change achieves a loss reduction to 56.267 W. This is the
best of the eight possible configurations in terms of power
(21) loss.
Finally, consider the application of the two-stage
(22)
branch exchange method proposed in Ref. 6. In the two-
stage branch exchange, the first-stage branch exchange is
4. Numerical Examples
performed regardless of whether or not the power loss
decreases, which is confirmed at the second-stage branch
In order to verify the multibranch exchange method,
exchange. Therefore, the switch combinations of the first-
we conducted numerical simulations on the example sys-
and second-branch exchange are as shown in Table 2. Thus,
tem in Fig. 1 and on a real-scale system. In particular, we
all eight combinations (including initial system and those
compared single- and double-branch exchange in terms of
basic efficiency.

4.1 Example system in Fig. 1

First we applied conventional branch exchange to the

example system shown in Fig. 1. The section loads and
impedances of the example system are given in Table 1. The
initial current switch and feeder currents are shown in Fig.
7.
In the branch exchange method, a loop system is
formed by closing switch 1 or 4. Then a new radial
configuration is obtained by opening switches so as to
minimize the current passing through the loop. When
switch 1 is closed [Fig. 8(a)], the smallest current is offered
by switch 1. Therefore, this operation does not alter the
system configuration and power loss. For the closing of Fig. 7. Initial currents of example system.

44
 Fig. 8. Branch exchange operations.
Fig. 9. Double-branch exchange operations.
Table 2. Two-stage branch exchange operation
Table 3. Size of real-scale system
Table 4. Calculation results
45
Fig. 10. Reduction of power loss in successive
iterations.
obtained at the first-stage exchange) must be searched,
which does not appear highly efficient.
4.2 Real-scale system
A loss minimization calculation was performed for
the 44-feeder distribution system described in Table 3. The
system has 1506 switches, including 218 open switches in
the initial state, and 1332 sections. The power loss in the
initial state was 938.2371 kW.
Calculation results are given in Table 4, and Fig. 10
shows how power loss is reduced by successive iterations.
For comparison, the results obtained by the conventional
branch exchange method are also given. Here the CPU time
includes only the time required for branch exchange: data
read and other operations are not considered.
As is evident from Table 4 and Fig. 10, the double-
branch exchange method achieves better loss reduction than
the conventional branch exchange method. As regards com-
puting time, the conventional method requires about 0.8 s,
while the double-branch exchange method requires about
4.4 s, or 5.5 times as long. However, this is a quite practical
time considering the system size.
5. Conclusions
We have developed a method for loss minimization
in a distribution system by using multibranch exchange, and
have verified the method by applying it to a simple example
system and a real-scale system.
We may expect further reductions of power loss when
three or more branches are exchanged, which would, how-
ever, result in explosive growth of the computing time. In
the future, we plan to investigate the optimal selection of
branch multiplicity and branch combinations for efficient
calculations.
 In addition, methods should be developed to deal
with constraints on the voltage and line capacity that are
ignored in this study (including the operation of voltage
regulators).
The method proposed in this study can also be ap-
plied to distribution systems involving dispersed gener-
ators, which have been gaining popularity. This, too, is a
topic for future research.
REFERENCES
1. Ross DW, Patton J, Cohen AI, Carson M. New
method for evaluating distribution automation and
control (DAC) systems benefits. IEEE Trans Power
Apparatus Syst 1981;PAS-100:2978–2986.
2. Civanlar S, Grainger JJ, Yin H, Lee SSH. Distribution
feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction. IEEE Trans
Power Delivery 1988;3:1217–1223.
3. Baran ME, Wu FF. Network reconfiguration in dis-
tribution systems for loss reduction and load balanc-
ing. IEEE Trans Power Delivery 1989;4:1401–1407.
4. Merlin A, Back H. Search for a minimal-loss operat-
ing spanning tree configuration for an urban power
distribution system. Proc 5th PSCC 1975;1:1–18.
5. Shirmohammadi D, Hong HW. Reconfiguration of
electric distribution networks for resistive line losses
reduction. IEEE Trans Power Delivery 1989;4:1492–
1498.
6. Nara K, Satoh T, Kuwabara H, Aoki K, Kitagawa M,
Ishihara T. Distribution systems expansion planning
by multi-stage branch exchange. IEEE Trans Power
Syst 1992;7:208–214.
APPENDIX
1. Derivation of Power Loss for Uniformly
Distributed Loss
Consider a section with uniformly distributed loss
current Il and inflow current Iin as shown in Fig. A.1.
Fig. A.1. Uniformly distributed load.
46
With the section length and impedance denoted by,
respectively, L and R, the current flowing at a distance x
from the inflow end is Ix = Iin − (x / L)Il. The impedance of
a small section ∆x at a distance x from inflow end is ∆r =
(R/L)∆x. According to assumptions (3) and (4), the reactive
part of the power flow can be ignored, and therefore the
power loss in the small section ∆x can be expressed as
follows:
(A.1)
Therefore, the power loss in this section is
(A.2)
2. Derivation of Power Loss Reduction Due to
Branch Exchange
2.1 Derivation of power loss increase due to
load addition
Let us find the increase in the power loss when a load
∆I is added to the end of the transmission line as shown in
Fig. A.2.
With the load and impedance of section i denoted by,
respectively, Ii and Ri, the increase of the power loss in this
section can be found by using Eq. (A.2) as follows:
(A.3)
Here ∆Ei is the voltage drop in the section. Here we express
the voltage drop in the section in Fig. A.1 as follows:
(A.4)
Fig. A.2. Distribution line with added load.
 Therefore, the increase of the power loss in the entire Now the following is obtained by substituting Eq. (A.9) into
distribution system is Eq. (A.7):

(A.5)
2.2 Derivation of Eq. (2)

The load of sections 1 to l is transferred from feeder

F1 to feeder F2 as shown in Fig. A.3.
If branching is present, we may assume that the
(A.10)
branch point is a section with zero impedance and the load
of the branch section because the power loss does not
In addition, ∆PL can be expressed by means of Eq. (A.2) as
change in the branch sections. The variation of the power follows:
loss ∆PLoss can be expressed as follows:

(A.6)

Here ∆PF1, ∆PL, and ∆PF2 are the variations at, respectively,
sections l + 1 to n of feeder F1, sections 1 to l of feeder F1,
and feeder F2.
Using Eq. (A.5), ∆PF1 and ∆PF2 can be expressed as
follows:

(A.7)

(A.8) (A.11)

__
Here ∆Ei is the voltage drop of section i after the load Thus, from Eqs. (A.6), (A.8), (A.10), and (A.11),
transfer; it can be found from the voltage drop before the
load transfer as follows:

(A.12)

Here E1 and E1g are the voltage drops from feeders F1 and
F2 to the ends of the switch to be closed, respectively.
(A.9)
The part of the third term in curly brackets in Eq.
(A.12) can be transformed as follows:

(A.13)

Therefore, the following can be derived from Eqs. (A.12)

and (A.13):

(A.14)
Fig. A.3. Load transfer.

47
 AUTHORS (from left to right)

Masahiko Murai (member) completed the M.E. program at Kyoto University in 1991 and joined Toshiba Corporation.
He is now affiliated with the Power and Industrial Systems R&D Center. His research interests are planning, operation and
control of power and energy systems. He is a member of ISCIE, SICE, ORSJ, and IEEE.

Yoko Kosaka (member) received a bachelor’s degree from Nihon University in 1990 and joined Toshiba Corporation. She
is now affiliated with the Power and Industrial Systems R&D Center. Her research interests are operation, supervision, control,
and analysis of power systems.

Takenori Kobayashi (senior member) completed the doctoral program at the University of Tokyo in 1995. He joined
Toshiba Corporation in 1994, and is now affiliated with the Power and Industrial Systems R&D Center. His research interests
are analysis, operation, and control of power and energy systems. He holds a D.Eng. degree, and is a member of IEEE.

Yumiko Kaneshiga (member) received a bachelor’s degree from Ochanomizu University in 1986 and joined Toshiba
Corporation. She is now affiliated with the Power Control Computer Systems Department, and is engaged in the development
of power systems control facilities.

48